 So welcome to everyone here and across the various time zones to this joint seminar and webinar. It's organized by the Journal of Grand Change, Department of Development Studies and the Source South Asia Institute. I'm Jens Lager from Journal of Grand Change and the Development Studies and we have a panelist who is the Deputy Director of the South Asia Institute here as well. I don't know if you want to say welcome as well or thank you, thank you. So today's seminar is seminar webinar. It is also the UK launch of the book, Gudjerat, Cradle and Harbinger of Identity Politics. And today's main speakers are the two authors of the book, Jan Bremen who's here and Gansham Shah who is joining us online. We will see him later I think. The seminar webinar is also supported by Rumbitso, the student ambassador and also people behind the scenes. So there's a bit of setup here and finally Ed Simpson who is the director of the South Asia Institute will join us as a discussant online. He's tested positive for COVID so he will have to be online. The topic of the book and of today's seminar is only too timely. The speakers and the book set out to analyze the genesis and dominance of Hindutva in Gudjerat and by extension in India. To do that is even more important today than ever as the main Hindutva political party, the BJP, goes from one state election victory to the other and as its majoritarian rule by and large is unchallenged. There should be important lessons to learn from focusing on Gudjerat as the cradle and harbinger of this development. Let me now introduce to you the two speakers, even though the standard saying that the speakers need no introduction in this case is more true than usual. Certainly to me, they have always been around as significant go to fixed points in an otherwise changing world of concerned and critical social science that is relating to India. President Bremen has conducted anthropological fieldwork in Gudjerat since the early 60s 62. And his empirical research focused on the bottom segment of the rural and urban workforce discusses the changing plight of labor in the colonial and post-colonial era through numerous books, articles, etc. Going back more than once to the same sites of investigations enabled him to trace the shape and direction of the political economy of one of India's leading state, Gudjerat. And the book, perhaps this inequality of labor in India in 2019 to 20s and overview of his quite disconcerting findings. This is the book before this. The second is Professor Emeritus of Comparative Sociology at the University of Amsterdam and Honorary Fellow at the International Institute of Social History also in Amsterdam. The second speaker is Gansham Shah. Let's see if we can do that. Gansham Shah is now an independent researcher and retired professor of the Nehru University in New Delhi. He is the earlier director and professor of the Center of Social Studies in Suran in Gudjerat. He's also a healthy and better chair professor at the LAL, about the Shastri National Academy of Administration in Musuri and several other positions including fellow in residence at the University of Amsterdam Institute of Advanced Studies in Rassana, etc. etc. He has also authored and co-authored edited numerous books including social inclusion and education in India from 2020. The first published in this civil society in governance, growth and development which ways Gudjerat going from 2014 untouchability in rural India from 2006, and the classic social movements in India first published in, like in 1981. With this brief introduction to the main speakers, I will first give the word to Jan Bremen for a fairly short presentation. We have circulated a short video based on an interview with Jan Bremen and presenting evidence from Gudjerat from 2013 for people to watch before the seminar and I hope you've done it. We did that so that Jan can concentrate more on big picture stuff in his presentation here and so we take for granted that people have watched that. After that, Gansham Shah will discuss aspects of the Gudjerat experience in more detail. And around 45 minutes from now, we should then proceed to its Simpsons comments and quiz and then a question and answer session. But for now, I'll hand over to you. Thanks. First, let me make clear that Gansham Shah and I myself we know each other for most of the years that I've been working on India. For most of the years and we are good colleagues, but we're also good friends and that helped in beginning this, this book and ending the book we've closely worked together and are very happy that it got published. It so happens that most of my work on India is has been published by one major publisher in India Oxford University Press. They refuse this book. It's not on our agenda at the moment. The issue of Communalism is not on our agenda. And that was the same reply that Gansham got who has published most of his work with Sage and also Sage said no sorry we won't do this. That speaks about the, the way that Hindutva is being discussed in in public. It is not being discussed in public, it is only being discussed by Hindutva and those who admire and our proponents of Hindutva. The others who are of a different view of the opposing view that Hindutva is not in the best interest of India. They are what I would call underground kind of illegality. And I use that in the meaning that I experienced when I was a very young boy of school aging boy. I was, I was advised not to do that but I'll do that now I hear it also. Sorry, shall I begin again or not. Okay. The new meaning of illegality. As a young school growing boy, our country, the Netherlands was occupied by Germany. And I have often had the feeling. I experienced occupation occupation in the, in the sense that the government who laws over you is not your government. It's another government. It's not only another government, it's a hostile government. You don't feel happy, but yours is not much you can do about it. And what struck me while doing my research at the bottom basically of the economy and society of India and good year in particular, that the people who interested me most are living under occupation. They are occupied in the sense that they, the, the, the, the, when I first went to good year out it was under another political regime, the Congress regime. And the saying then was that security my babes, the government is our mother and father. The government has now has never been the mother and father of the dispossessed of the disenfranchised. But certainly, it is not now so. The government is not the mother and father of the disenfranchised. They are even not citizens of the country. They are not considered citizens of the country. So this comparison between what I experienced as a young boy basically flavors my thinking on what in do what does at the bottom of the economy and society in in India. And the video which was sent to you to all those who registered show it's a recording an interview which I had in 2013. More or less summed up what the leader then of the in do already and the chief minister of good year out. The Modi, what his impact had been on the fabric on the social political and economic fabric of good year out. Now it's nearly it's almost 10 years later. And what I felt then, but I felt then has it changed my feelings have my has it changed my views. And it's almost 1010 years. And the, I was appalled of what it had meant to the people I care for, and there are many of them in good year out. I was appalled in 2030. And I talked to my friends and colleagues. He's coming out to the national level soon. That was very clear in the upcoming elections then of 2014. I'm scared. I'm scared for the future of India. I'm scared for the future of people living in, in India, many people living in India. And they laughed at me, my friends and colleagues outside good year out. He could do that in good year out he won't do it he won't be able to do it we won't allow for that that it will happen in India. It has happened in India and that's why I will in the short introduction I have, I will focus on the similarities between the German occupation in the Netherlands under Nazi rule. And the Hindutva rule in India at the moment. What were the main features of Nazi governance in my country. In the first place, there was the Führer principle, the Führer principle, the leader, who leads his, his fold to the glorious destiny, the future destiny. I think Adolf Hitler, holding forth in my camp. My struggle. Narendra Modi holds holds forth. It was going on in India today in praising commanding commendable things. As I said as a shepherd tending to his flock. This is a Hindu mission advocated in a mine camp mindset. It's the idea of genetic superiority of a master race of people that were the Germans, the master race of people as the chosen people. They are chosen because of their Aryan genetics, they are superior. On the other side. There are the under mansion. The subhumans who don't count and who shouldn't be there. Because they are blocked on the nation. They don't belong. The heron folk versus the under mansion the subhumans as the inferior species. What I see. And that was very much what I experienced as a young boy. I was a young boy. I was not an adult man. I was sufficiently young and alert to understand what was happening. I saw what was happening. I felt it was happening. It had an impact on me and on the household to which I belong. A lot of equality and social justice in the structure of society. And as a Nazi. The role in Germany was. Stratified. Was a hierarchy was a hierarchy. So he knew twice a hierarchy. Is the big brother and his twice born. At the commanding heights. The hangers on in the middle rank. And the food soldiers down below. It's Hindu is not equal. It is a hierarchy. It is very much based on inequality. And that of course is the ingrained. Heritage. Structuring of inequality in society. And what society does and doesn't do. And there is also the need to segregate those who do not belong to default. There is a need to segregate them. They don't belong. They shouldn't be there and they should be segregated from mainstream society. This is the phenomenon of ghettoization, which I saw as a young boy in Amsterdam. When the Jews were taken out of their houses throughout the city. And were deported in a fertile in a quarter of the city, which was meant for the Jews. And their apartheid it was not only the it's not only the Muslims in India who are ghettoized. It's also the labouring poor. Who do not have enough to climb above the so called poverty line. Wherever they live. They live in slums. Either in the city. Or in the countryside. And not just in the village separated segregated in the village in their own colonies. Separated from mainstream society. And their apartheid. Because that's what it is. As to be made visible publicly visible. As the Jews had to wear. And that's why you could see. A yellow star. They don't belong and they should be. They are beyond the pale. And should be made aware that they are beyond the pale. Another feature which reminds me of what I experienced. Is the paradigm of collaboration and resistance. And that's when I said talking about resistant there is a new illegality. It's speaking against the dominant trend, the dominant authority. But you have to do that underground. There is an underground press in India coming up. Particularly in the social media because the mainstream. Only this disseminate the propaganda and the fake news. If you want to know the counter failing news. The truth. You have to go to other media. But the collaboration begins. With the economic and political profiteers at the top. Big business. As big business in Germany. Was Nazi. Was Nazi fight. A dedicated cater of adept and proponents. This dispelling disseminating the faith. The face of Hindutva. And for that BJP is political platform with a variety of front organizations. As the Nazi party had a lot of front organizations around them. To organize society. Nazi is and was organized. Hindutva is organized. A variety of front organizations with the RSS as the think tank. There is also the vigilantism. The vigilantism. Incaders undergoing military training. You've seen that on the video. But also volunteers. Volunteers who spontaneously quote unquote. Assemble in mobs for lynching partners. Link lynching parties. For those. Who don't know the line or who go beyond. Their. Inferior presence. There are the ratias. Which I experienced as a young boy that the strong army of the state. Gordon's off. Neighborhoods. And carries out search. Parties. To find out who is who what's going on. The strong arm of the state also to wipe out popular protest. The regime resorts to wide scale trespassing of the law. And the obliteration obliteration of acquired rights. Which the regime systematically resorts to. That's a side of the collaboration. On the other side. The opposite side. There are the social and human rights activists who practice illegality, as I said, but illegality in this new underground meeting. Speaking against. Acting against. Or dissenters. Going into hiding. As people. In also in my household, went into hiding. To escape from the reach of the state. They became illegal. They went underground. To remain beyond the reach of the Hindu. Of power and authority. And in between there. The liberation and the resistance. There is the broad middle ground. Of bowing down in intimidated acceptance. In addition, there are all those who pretend that they do not see. Who are willing to soft paddle the malign impact of the end of politics. Or wanting to ignore and just keep mum. The middle ground. Is very much there in India. Then there is what in, in German is called class shelter. The notification of society and authority. By which adults Hitler and the Nazi party successfully successfully established a set a system of totalitarian control. By the Dutch of German society and countries occupied by Nazi Germany. And that's a vacation from economy to trade unions to media to culture to education. Also to a health care. The imperative need of the totalitarian state to establish a surveillance apparatus, a surveillance apparatus. To control this loyalty. Mr police and the judiciary as its instruments. And those who refuse and resist run the risk of detention without trial. The not unable the night and fork operations, the fake encounters where people are taken out because they are too dangerous to the established regime. They are taken out in fake encounters. The loss of freedom and of speech of organization, which you learned also as a young school boy to keep silent, not to notice, not to observe. There is the role of the right to citizenship and the distribution of public provisions for those who fail to join the fold, or are not eligible to join the fold. Muslims, the laboring poor, those who are not able to organize their own livelihood are basically depended polarized on the state, but don't get the provisions. Because they are willing not to adhere to the atma nearby doctrine. And another, the last similarity. Hitler came to power, winning elections. And Modi has come to power, winning elections. But having one elections. Also introducing meteoritarianism that obstruct democracy. That abuses the rule of law and secularism has laid down in the Constitution. The establishment of a culture of diversity by insistence on sameness and the invoking of hate, instead of tolerance to the other. All similarities, but one dissimilarity and a very striking one. It was defeated by an alliance of forces, hostile to Nazism. And those who were hostile to Nazism, they belong to a variety of opinions and worldviews, how to organize society, what to do with the economy. But they were united in defeating the main enemy. And one dissimilarity is not in India. You do not see a coalition of those political parties and sympathies, which do not belong to the end of our fault. I think we should now listen to Ganshan. Thank you very much for this powerful comparison which we no doubt will return to in the discussion. It does indeed move on to Ganshamsa, Ganshama over to you. Thank you very much. So as an institute for organizing this function. This is a really coincident that for more than a full decade back during my young academic journey. I spent three months at SOAS back in 1976. It was emergency. And I was a young scholar, an exchange program to UGC and British Council. And what Bremen has said, during that time the Indian Embassy instructed me not to participate in any procession or in meetings opposing the emergency. Well, you get that kind of situation in a different way in 2022. I'm happy that, and I recall that I had spent good time and the interaction with Professor Adrian Mayer, Terry Byers, David Taylor, Peter Robert, and next load. Next load there, I don't know if it is it. Institute of Commonwealth Studies, Professor Morris Jones. At the very end of my career. I feel that I'm privileged to be back to SOAS and become somewhat nostalgic. Thank you very much for this. Very rightly described what he's experienced during his young days in Netherlands. And cannot have it to kind of see but ban lists. Similar situation is developing in India. Freedom of speech in citizens decay. There are a lot of constraints on those rearing the same with the government. Yeah, I know the Yarn as a nightmare that what he saw during his school days in Netherlands made the peak in India. I just don't know. I don't want to go into it. And let me straight away from to what in London. This book except the three chapters most all chapters. I have written over 60 years. I first wrote in 1969, which is there. And the last one was 2019. So it's a long journey. What I was writing that I could do any on focusing on delivering class. We are put together. My journey is questioning. I just when I started it was not. Hindutva was not very much on agenda. Not in India, not India. I will come back. How he just developed. But how did you just develop in Gujarat. I have tried to probe into it. And simultaneously I was trying to see factors and the interplay. For the rise of. What we see today is a heliportics in India. First, we experienced in Gujarat. And the Gujarat is a model for all India. Gujarat is not the industry. And all along my concern is. To understand the strategies. Of the property classes. To protect you the dominance. And the methods. They evolve. And. I'm more interested how they legitimize and develop. The hegemony. In society. And. More so on the office. Obviously the opposite. Often registered. Sometimes revolted. Against. The property classes. What. In Indian countries in the classes and the caste. And. Because the caste is important because the Hindutva. Is a Brahminical. The construct. Where as brahmini say. Inequality center. And again come back. In a moment. More puzzling for me. For last. For because I would say from 1980s onwards. That how. The office. Or at least a sector of office. We're registering. To the power. The power. Some of them got. Co-opted. Not only got caught. But also they legitimize. The Hindutva. And that is. My present. All alum for last four decades. I'm still. Do not have a definite answer to. But I'm. Trying to prove. Constantly on that. The question that. Presents me is that. Why. The operas have not been able to get united. Among themselves. As operas. To fight against the office. And these are the three, four questions about the strategies. Registrants of the press. Disunity and unity. This is a broad question that I have. I've tried to prove. All alone. And for that. I have moved. Forward and backward. The. Deformulated my questions. The. And. From 80s onwards. Because I also grew. In my understanding of. From 80s onwards. Particularly. What is the nature of what was the nature and what is now. In nature of. Communion consciousness or the Hindutva consciousness among the majority. People. Or more often to be oppressed. Both in terms of caste. And class. Under questions. That is. They're all. Those. Among the operation section. Will become. A proud middle class. Because my definition of middle class is not. Mark share. I will. Go. And I believe that. I believe that. For quality. And parentated the capitalist values. Among the poor. And. That is not only India. But I would say the world over. And that's a new phenomena. Which. Really. And while doing the studies. Of 80s. And 90s. And. Obviously. 2002. By. As a member of the. Inquiry committee commission. Of the 2002. The. Community. I was. Puzzling. How this kind of consciousness is. Develop. The. Why the oppression. And. The. The other day we're really suggesting and fighting. Why in the 90s. And 2000. Join hands. And also the instrument. And. All the property classes. The proponents of the end of the politics. Against. The other oppressed. Who. Happen to be. And. When talking to people and these and then also it's not. Talking to myself because my own life. I was. I was. And then. And then. Lead me. To go back. To historical. Processes. And in this book the first two chapters. At the first one. At the first one. And press. In fact, that is the time. The delay of this book. And. I appreciate. For that. And. And. Doing the historical things. I have really followed. Historians. Who have done work. In the medieval. Gujarat. And the 90s. And I would like to name. Samira Shake. Isaka Rigo from Japan. Or. I believe she was. Once associated with sauce. Nicholas ducks. And others. And of course. Which really prompted me. To read bag. Was. So as own book. On. Idea of Gujarat. Which I believe the idea of Gujarat is different. Then the idea of. India. And. First two chapters. Most. Because I'm not a historian. I read. I read. Try to understand digest. And then. I have tried to contextualize. In my way. There. We started the process over the period of time. We started the process over the period of time. Which. I now believe. Which grew from 19th century. And 20th century. And. Help the conservation. Of. The upper caste. And class. The upper caste and class. So the property caste. And. Where the Hindu tour. Is. Is somewhat. Cementing force. Uniting. Apparently. Uniting the oppressed Hindus. And. The property. Upper caste. But. So. Brahmins and. And in this. In the early 19th century. The. Orientalist. And. The. The kind of a policy that they fall. Which I call. A project of a colonial modernity. And this project. As you all. By the western. And. And. Concepts that they developed. About the civilization. About the society. About the progress. About the race. And. The property classes. Who were dominating but not enjoying. The hegemony. Society. They got the opportunities. They got the opportunities. Or. The British. Provided them opportunities. For developing. For their own purpose. Developing agriculture. Allow them. To cultivate land. In. For years. Cultivated by. The. Oppressed classes. They didn't have a normal. No. Provided them technology. And also. Industries. And that's normal. And that process. Really. Reinforce. The property. To. To. To. Find out the ways. To control. The office. And in this process. The sensors. The. System. Government. Government. Played a very important role. Enabling. The opposite. To. Consolidate. The positions. And. Invite. What they did. Is that. Having. Got the advantage. Of. Education. Western educations. Printing media. Printing books. So the new agency. Is. First. To. To. And the industry. But simultaneously. The control. Over. The agencies. Of production of knowledge. And that. Was the beginning. Of reconstructing. The communities. And then image of. And that. In the 1960s. They started. Writing. The history. What. You call it. Following. The British. Categories. And also. Writing textbooks for the schools. Standardizing. The Gujati language. Is the only standard language. For. And in that process they eliminated. The language. Is the wrong language. Of ordinary people. In Gujarat. Where speaking. And that process is still continued. It's not. On going. All this. Really. The. The value system. That was the brahminical. And that really. Senses. And these posts. What the sociologist called. The process of Sanskrit. Get the poor in our place. With. Immunity. Those who are closer to them. Little bit of. Also began to reinvent. In a brahminical model. And. And this. Really. Built up over the period of time. The brahminical structure. However, at the same time. In this process. The section of the oppress. Those. Who got the benefits. Of this education. Because it was not. Close brahminical structure. In fact the orientalist. Wanted to give. Only the brahminical. Education only. The Brahmins in the forecast. But the McCollis. And subsequent modernist. Or. Really open. Some. Place. For office. And. What happened in other parts of Guja. In India. In a Maharashtra. South India. Or a part of. Which Bunga part of Delhi. Of. A movement. Of the oppressed. For social justice. This was a some talk in Guja. In 19th century. But that has never happened. So unlike South India. Unlike Maharas. Guja says not. Or even you. Part of. You. And we have. Guja does not. Witness the backward cast. In the present technology. A moment. Some. Who got. Opportunity of educations and becoming white. They started. Registering. Under. And some. Accepting the situation. At effect. And this process. As. Really. Expanding and accelerated. Under the mix. So-called mix economy. And nearly. In the post independent. When I talk about. Historical processes. One cannot. Talk about the 20th century. The. Mahatma Gandhi. Was he dominated. He was from Gujarat. And he dominated. Gujarat. Public life. For. Nearly more than three decades from 1920s. 1940s. And there's a bank. Of. His followers. Gandhi was. Strong. From since 1906. For. Hindu Muslim. You believe. For. A non-religious. Lessons. Was. Deadly against. And for that. For Hindu Muslim. He supported. And. And subsequently. He died for that. Of course. But at the same time. Though. He rejected. The scriptures. He said that. The scriptures. Support the untouchability. I don't. But at the same time. And I will. Say that because of his. Life. Because. He was. From upper caste. And kind of environment in which he grew. During the young days. Before going to Africa. And then. Was under the shadow of. Orientalist. Of India. Of a glorious past. So. The team. Of workers. Develop under him. He really. Who's. Work. For the oppressed. As a partner. A compassion. From them. But this compassion. Was. Essentially. Without empathy. It. Is. It really. Brother. We're doing these things. The guardians. Really. Incalculate the brahmins. Among the. Encourage them. For. Imitating the forecast. And not opposing them. He avoided the conflict. In the same manner. You founded. The. In 1920. 1918. Textile. State Union. Is. Principal. Boss. And has been continued. Is a class. Not only that. During 40 years. This text. Though. For the Hindu. Unity. By the same time. Encourage. The Brahmin rituals. Symbols. And idioms. Among the workers. The workers. Remain. A worker. A. A worker. And not able to develop. A worker. As a identity. I personally feel. I have not done so. That. The radicals. You don't believe in the. Class conflict. And radicals of. All varieties. Mostly coming from. A Brahmin class. They also said. The premier. And that was the reason why. For. Long period they know. The cultural dimension. Of the caste. In Indian society. Now. In the book. There's a one chapter study of 1969. That's. I studied. And I also studied. The 1973. In the world. Which is not in the book. But publishing. Become political. I'm convinced. That. Are engineer. They are created. For creating. Social insecurity. Incultate. Nationalist values. Hindu nationalist values. Hindu nationalist values. Hindu nationalist values. And also. Inculcate. What I saw in 69 diets. What I saw in 69 diets. As a young scholar. As a young scholar. I have closely observed. And yarn as. In this book also. Are chapters of that. To find. A similar pattern. But what is important. That I need to emphasize. Is that. The 1973. That I studied. I was fortunate to get the police data. And I found. That. Those who were actively. Participate in the various. All of them were. From a lumpen working class. But the important. In the present context. In the present context is that. Majority of them. Belong to. Upper and middle class. And not. The OBC the lease. Retributes. From 1980s onwards. The proportion has completely changed. The proportion. Of the active participants. The violence. Happen to be. From the oppressed. From the oppressed classes. And the upper caste. Participants. Have gone into background. In mobilizing. Engineering. And planning. The riots. And that's what you can see. In the subsequent. And that really bothers. What happened. In 1980s. This is. This is extremely interesting. And I can see how your argument is unfolding. But in order to. Give time for questions as well. Could I ask you to. Bring it to a close within the next five minutes or so. Thank you. I will say that I just. Take a few. For five minutes. And I just stopped. Just I want to mention about the 1980s. Which is a turning point. Which is a turning point. The. The. Hindu. The proponents of a Hindu. The RSS. Slowly is the priority was built the culture. Rather than. Capturing power immediately. From the 1930s onwards. And 1980s. They evolved a certain. Concept like. Some rasta homogeneity. Diverted. So-called backward caste movement in Gujarat. To the. Anti-Muslim movements. And the. And. And also. Capture. Almost 80%. Of the. Civil society. In that project. And ultimately what. I am witnessing. That. Except a few minorities. Persons here and there. The main. Civil society. And the state. At most the same. And that makes. Difficult. For a radical section. Civil society. To operate. And register their voice. Their voice. They do it continuously. And what. In Gujarat. Of sight-checking people. Eliminating. The dissent voices. Abrogating. Institutions. And creating a fear. And from. 2003 onwards. The capitalist openly come. In support. And they declare that. In. 2003 2004. That they declare that. Moodio. Is the best CEO of India. And that process continued. 2012. And. We were able to become India's Prime Minister. Almost using the same. Technique. Thank you. Let me add that. And I'm sorry that. If I, if I cut you a bit short, but. Because it was really. These discussions of how. BGP. And Modi grew out of. Of. Of that historical background is of course hugely interesting. And I'm sure we will return to it again. For now though. I will hand over to it. It's. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Good evening everybody, whether you're on campus. Or on the webinar. I'd like to take this opportunity to. Extend the warm welcome to you. So us and. Remind you that we are in a university. Home of academic debate. We enjoy challenge. We enjoy. Argument debate. But we also believe that. Many different opinions can be. Express with respect. And there's nothing in this environment. That couldn't be said with. Politeness. So it's a difficult. Task to be. A discussant. In this environment. The authors of the book. We're here to launch. Are two of the most respected. And senior scholars. In my own field. Writing about. Western India. I have studied. Their. Work for many years. And in the case of. Professor Shah. I have. Read it meticulously. As a chronicle really. Of history and politics. In postcolonial. And I'm. Delighted. Yeah. Collaborated. In this book. I think the collaboration is. Particularly important. Because of their seniority. Their knowledge of history. Of class and caste politics. In the region. They bring such experience. And long standing. Scholarly interest together. Speaks for the importance of. The message. Is conveyed in this book. So as the evening is drawing on. I will confine my comments. Really to four questions. Which. Can be put quite succinctly I hope. Since. Modi moved on from. Good your art. And took up residence in Delhi. We've had three. Chief ministers in the state. And then the Patel VJ Rupani. And the Pender Patel. I sometimes feel sitting in London. It's almost as if. They are not there. They have no presence on it. On an international stage. And indeed. But Pender Patel's own website. Has more of Narendra Modi on it. Than it does. About his own. Politics. So I suppose my question. Is. What has happened in good your art. After. Narendra Modi. And is it significant. Have the chief ministers been left. In place in essence as project. Managers. Sort of job done. Kind of scenario. In good your art. Now we can move on. But an Andy Patel. I know. Is now governor. Of UP. Which is a particularly. Significant. Appointment. Given forthcoming elections. And the constellation. Of politics. In the. In the country. So each of my questions. Is a riff. Off. The key word. In the title of the book. And to remind everyone. That's good your art. And to remind everyone. That's good your art. And to remind everyone. That's good your art. That's good your art. And to remind everyone. That's good your art. And to remind everyone. That's good your art. Cradle. And harbinger. And finally we come to. Identity. So my first. That was my first question. About good your art. The second question. Is about the cradle. And. I think. Probably. If I can imagine the text. You tell the story of how. Particular. Cast and class. Configurations. Emerged in good your art. But I suppose as a. Discussant. I want to ask if you think. There's anything. Intrinsic. To that composition of. Cast and class. Interests. That meant. That the Hindu project. Took off in good your art. Rather than in. Maharashtra. Or Madhya Pradesh. For example. The harbinger. Question. Is about. Having observed. As well. Politics in good your art. Myself. Not over. Such a long period of. Time. I was really. Struck. When the. Swaminarayan. Back. Sec. Opened the Akshadam. Temple in Delhi. In 2005. They changed. The liturgical. Language. From Gujarati to Hindi. That was a major. Cultural. And political. Statement. So I suppose. I'm also. Interested in asking. To. You. You. You. You. You. You. You. You. You. You. You. You. You. You. You. What else do you think has changed as the Hindu project has. Gone from provincial state formation. To a national level. and in this particular event. And I'm going to ask it in the most naive possible way. Both of you have written about very similar things for a very long time. I understand that this book is a fantastic collaboration that brings together your collective experience and wisdom. But I want to ask you who this book is for in your imagination. And who, so who is the reader? And what would you like your reader to do with what they read? Thank you very much. Thanks so much, Ed, and thanks for doing this in spite of COVID, that is much appreciated. I think we should have a quick round with the two speakers to comment quickly on the question. We can maybe throw in one of the questions before we go. Let us do that first, please. Well, this round, let us start with you. Yeah, next round we will start with Ganjem. Thanks, Ed, and good to see you also in your COVID shape. One of the things which is very striking is that the Rene Ramodi, however important he is, he is also the reflection of a societal mindset. It is not just the one who is at the top, but he is at the top because he resonates, he reflects what is a very strong opinion in India and which is based on inequality, which is based not on compromise, which is based not on tolerance, but which is based, which is very self-centric in the surfing of interests. And the Rene Ramodi is an organizational man. We have to understand the Hindutva phenomenon also by the failure of the regime which was before Hindutva for a couple of decades, the ruling regime, which was Congress. And at a very particular moment in time, the then leader of Congress Indira Gandhi decided to do without an organized party but to speak to the people at large, not to the people who accepted Congress is the best solution to India's destiny, but she could do without party followers as he abolished the cater which was there very much so also in Gujarat. And she centered authority and power in her own apparatus. That is very similar, but more organized, more systematic and more committed than she did is what Modi did. So that organizational feature, those organizational features, you have to organize society in order to get control, not to give control to society, but to get control over society which is important. And then Modi asked the Gujarat flavor of the harbinger question, the bringing of India to a better future. That is very much phrased in terms of nationhood, in terms of nationhood. The nationhood now becomes the ultimate objective of what Modi wants to realize and Hindutva India and behind that nationhood is only Hindutva. And that is very important. That former idea of plurality, of diversity, of having to live among you with people who have different beliefs, values, norms and interests does not come easy to Hindutva. And it is clear that Hindutva does not tolerate it. But I don't think that we should, when we talk about Hindutva, we should talk only about Modi, absolutely not. The apparatus around him with Amit Shah as his sidekick is very important in this realization of a surveillance state and taking out dissenters voices who should not be there. So that apparatus, that makes me indeed make the comparison with Nazi Germany. The apparatus of a state surveillance in the control over society, which is important and which defines nationhood and congruence with the interest of the nation with Hindutva which destroys the diversity which has been the major, very important, significant civilizational contribution of India, its diversity, its plurality, its multi-formity, not its single-mindedness, not the sameness, not insisting on doing away with all those ideas but also all those people who do not belong and do not want to belong to the fault of you. Thank you, Jan. Let us go straight to Gancham. On this question, I don't have to say anything because I have not followed Swaminayan sect. But as you know, it's a predominantly of the Partidars and Modi is very close to the community in the Swaminayan sect and he had gone out of his way to support Swaminayan sect in Gujarat but simultaneously also supported a non-Swaminayan Partidars because his interest is the Partidars as such and the dominant of Swaminayan are the Partidars. And also, Swaminayan is a major strength of his international support in America, in England and elsewhere. That's all that I would like to say there. But there was another question that somebody asked me. It's what is unique of Gujarat and that really bothers me for the last several years. I increasingly believe that there is nothing unique of Gujarat as a Gujarat society. I tend to believe that what has happened in Gujarat can happen elsewhere also if the same factors daily work. It's more or less because it cannot reproduce the society itself. One thing is that what I mentioned during my talk is that unlike other places, many places that you know because you don't have enough historical studies over different regions or at least I'm not aware of that. So unlike the South India of Tamil Nadu or Kerala of Maharas or in North India, Gujarat somehow had no backward cast or depraved cast movement. They were the resistance and revolt. But among the middle class as it happened elsewhere, that was the absence. And therefore the OBC, large backward cast who are really a scattered, very heterogeneous. There is no way, nobody is trying to really unite. The Gujarat OBC gimmicks and I seriously call gimmicks of 1980s of Maharashtra Solanki had just a erupting purpose without backward cast politics like the Luya or in South India. And therefore it immediately backfired and the Gujarati could really handle well of the OBC. That's all. Thank you. Thank you. So it is now time for us to open up the floor for questions. And of course as always when it is a mixed seminar and webinar session, we will take questions from the floor here in the room, as well as written questions from online, plus people online can raise their hand and ask questions early as well. So we'll try to handle that as well as we can. So we'll start with this one question here from the room and then we will go to some of the questions that are sitting there already online. But let's start with Evinesh. I'll give you the microphone now. Over to you. Thank you. Thank you, Professor Bremen, Professor Shah Anand for this fascinating conversation. I want to push this, you know, this question has been asked partly and I've, you know, Professor Shah has also kind of offered some response to this but my question is slightly different it's not about why Gujarat is unique. My question is why Gujarat. This is an ideology, the key architects historically speaking comes from Marathi Brahmins, Savarkar, even the RSS chief the first, you know, Gul Valkar, and there's a particular salience and appeal of Hindutva in in parts of Maharashtra which is still there. The demographic focus simply because of sheer numbers and because it's a Hindi belt is UPBHR primarily but not just of course I appreciate that. Yet, the idea of Hindutva taking off as, you know, in a political sense, especially during the, you know, post-Babri in Gujarat. Why Gujarat? And for me this is something I hear the point that there is perhaps not enough counter mobilization of some sort. But to me I wonder whether there is something else to be said about identities rather than societies as such where Marathi identity has a different caliber of interaction with Hindu nationalism. When that Gujarati identity has not had that kind of challenge to Hindu nationalism either, even though the idea of being Gujarati is quite consequential in cultural sense and social sense in a transnational sense. So this is how I, you know, if I could encourage you perhaps to elaborate this, why is it that it's Gujarat, which is considered the so-called laboratory. And not with the Pradesh even though we saw the results of the Pradesh elections recently, which has shown a very decisive shift away from regionalism or regional political parties. And even Maharashtra, the Shivshena is holding ground, but we don't know for how long, right. This question has always rankled me if I look at the larger kind of ecosystem so to say of the Hindu right. Gujarat being the space where it actually took off, is there something more than just caste class or just social dynamics. There's something more that explains the timing of it, because riots we have seen whether engineer do not happen in Delhi, happen in Mumbai, happen in different parts of the country. It's not a Gujarat focus phenomenon, neither are they a BJP centric phenomenon either right. Commonal violence is has happened during Congress regimes to in Gujarat as well. So why Gujarat why then is there something else going on over there. Thank you. Thank you very much. We have a question at the tail end there and then we'll go to the to the written questions on the, on the chat afterwards. Thank you. My right and thinking that Gujarat has a disproportionate number of non resident Indians. And is that a factor. It has been suggested that the BJP was created in the diaspora. I mean, some people argue about that. And is that a factor which is relevant in the fact that Gujarat and Maharashtra have got a disproportionate number of non resident Indians. And could you give some background about that. Thank you. Yes, let us just take a couple of more questions here from from the chat and add them to to the next round that that that you can then in a sense pick and choose between the questions to answer. So the first question reads question for both panelists. What is the Gujarati norm Gandhi or Modi. And the second question reads, I have a comment to make. Can you help me to intervene from afar Frank Perlin. So I think you'd like to admit and speak. And I think maybe Frank if you could sort of just type in the chat. I'll read the second question from resistance to co-option of the oppressed. It seems that both of you see a subaltern Hindutva intensifying the power of properties classes class. Then I was wondering how do you see the movement in Gujarat and the ongoing farmers movement at the national level. Thank you. All, all big questions and of course we we also have have the question left over from last time maybe that one of its question. Who is the book for maybe still sits there as well. Should we should we ask Ganshan to start commenting on on these questions. I'm not following all questions. Whatever I follow to questions. The first question is why Gujarat. That's also I do not say I have a definite answer. Because in my house. RSS is a stronghold. But we just could not develop what we could do. I think that too possible. The explanation that I can give one. Is what I've seen is unlike my husband. A second and more important that what I feel. Is it beginning of the. RSS or Hindutva. The base was among the traders. In Gujarat because Gujarat does not have a brahmins as a dominant class. It's a money on that. It's a mercantile. And mercantile communities of Gujarat and those who become the mercantiles party does. The world over. They say the same culture kind of things. Might be contributing for the rise of Hindutva. Rise of Modi from 70s onwards. And that is because my house also had a pair pair movement and still have a pair movement of the. Gujarat doesn't have to counter alternative conservative Hindu movement. So Modi had free head. Still. One has to probe further that what are the other factors. I personally believe that Gujarat does not have like many other parts of states. Is a strong Gujati identity. And that was the reason why. In 1956, my movement did not get support as it got embarrassed. This was first time the Gujati identity was raised by the former Congress. For the issue of. But the economic interest comes rather than a cultural interest. I think Gujati. A podcast. That mindset or the economic interest. The universal interest became a party to the Gujati justice or injustice. And on that the movie very skillfully played in the subsequent. And during his regime and thereafter, more important thereafter. He raised the issues. Of a son of the soil for himself. He raised the issues that he carries Gujati identity in this time. So he makes a Hindu tour and Gujati identity that he. What is constructed at the national level. And that work so after. 2014. The rather absurd against BJP. He repeatedly use. Gujati identity himself. Is a son of the soil. The present to you a good job at the national level. In all elections. And you visit elections. In 1798 frequently. The central argument was. Gujati representing the India. Thank you. Thanks. Let us go straight to. Well, on the question of. And it has already been mentioned by guns. The particular mercantile capitalism. That is very strong in good. Has played a major role in bringing up. And we also have to contextualize this in the. In the. In the economy of. Of good. It's not a coincidence that. Adani and Ambani. Are good. And they are the major. Powers. Money powers. Between. Behind. BJP. And. Of course. It is a kind of. A mercantile capitalism. Which. Makes. BJP very vulnerable to crony capitalism. Of course. And forgetting about the Bharat. The ID. It is big business. But. And that's what. Also. Modi wanted to attract to. To good. Luring him away from. Bengal and trying to. And giving him a place. It came to nothing. Of course. The small car. But giving him a place in. In good. And. In my thing. In my thinking. The weakest side of. Of. Modi and BJP. Is the economy. Is the economy. He. Has not been able to deliver. The slogan with which he came to power of. 20 million jobs. In short time. The employment creation is not happening. And. And that is. Has been turned around. Now in a new doctrine. Which he has. Which he is preaching. That of self-reliance. If you are not self-reliance. You don't count. If you cannot organize your own livelihood. That's your problem. But so you're also your fault. That's your defect. And. We see back the return of the non deserving poor. A kind of social Darwinist mentality. Which blames those who can't make it. For their own sins. They are defective. In not being able. To become self-reliant. And that leads now to new legislation. Which says that. Those people won't also be able to be given won't won't be given the provisions of the state. Be it. The. PDS card. Or public works. They should be thrown out. Of those professions. If you are not self-reliant. If you cannot organize your own livelihood. And that's indeed. A very typical. Gujarati trade. To be self-employed. If not. Being a boss yourself. Then at least. To be in control of yourself. Or what you are doing. And what you are. Where you are working and what you earn. With that. That. That. Taste. Self-reliance. Is very important. But I wonder if it is more important. In. Gujarat. Than anywhere else. So when I say. For my point of view. I'm speculating of course is all. As all of us do. That will be the weak side of BJP. Not be able to deliver. The economy. Which a great India. Needs. In order to. Take its role. In the globalized economy. The economy. The economic management. The economy. The economy. The economy. The economy. The economy. The economy. The economy. The economy. The economy. The economy. The economy. The economy. The economy. The economic management. Is very poor. It has been poor for a very long time. But under him. It has not become better. And that may be the most vulnerable side. Of. Thank you. And I think there's time for one more round of questions. Let me start by by apologizing to those online. Frank. heard in others that wanted to talk, to speak because it seems not to be possible in this setup. So hopefully we can get there written questions instead. So we'll return to them in a minute, but first we have a couple of questions here. Alessandra first there. Thanks a lot for this session. There's a lot of food for thoughts. I want to sort of make a comment on timelines and perhaps also connected to your last reflections on this rhetoric of these several alliance that the BJP carries with it. From the 1980s we also have seen a rise of neoliberalism pretty much everywhere. In India of course sort of the timeline of liberalizations is 91, but for many many have commented already the Rajiv era was strongly connected with the rolling of neoliberal policies. So I wonder how the BJP rhetoric has been amplified by neoliberalism. Also sort of noting that neoliberalism itself hasn't been really able to deliver economically, but this doesn't seem to have stopped is rise and rise. So if you could comment on that on the extent to which the rolling of neoliberalism in India has further amplified the type of rhetoric they will see as dominant in the context of the rise of our BJP. Thank you. Thank you and we have a question further down there. Hi thank you so much for your talk. My question is also kind of in conjunction with the previous question. So like perhaps like in context of like the 2002 Kshatriya it's like what we see as the impact of this kind of religious violence on like economic development like would you say there's some kind of causal mechanism like link between like religious repression and the health of the economy or vice versa like when the economy begins to have a downturn does the BJP focus more on is like anti-Muslim rhetoric to kind of distract from the fact that they aren't performing that well in terms of the economy. So what is your opinion on the causal mechanism either way? Thank you. Thank you and could we see if there are more questions online? Meanwhile maybe I can put in a question here as well which is relating to the relationship between the Congress and the BJP. Is Congress part of the solution or is it just BJP-like and with many of the cases many of the argument here is that it has all been part of a historical trajectory but right now can can broader alliance that can change BJP be put together with the Congress. So the next question reads are we not laying too much importance to Modi isn't it Brahminism the caste system that is the main roadblock it has always been there and then the next one reads how is Gandhi and Gandhi's interpretation and practice of Hinduism understood in the common sense in the current scenario? Excellent and unfortunately we have hardly and it does look as if there are others that would like to come in here after seven o'clock. So we have five minutes for a few short sharp comments should we start with Jan this time and go to Ganshan to finish it and you only have a couple of minutes I'm sorry this is impossible but there you go. Well a following up on what I said on mercantile capitalism and neoliberalism was already in in Gujarat before it became the mission all over the world it was already in the 1960s and 70s that Gujarat advertised in economic and political weekly come to Gujarat there are no labor laws here that kind of thinking and that kind of fabric is very strong in in in Gujarat so neoliberalism found a fertile ground but it was already there it was not it was not there but the difference is the later variety of neoliberalism did not filter in terms of redistribution to the lower to the bottom classes of the population in Gujarat as it had been doing somewhat under under Congress but from the 1990 onwards there was indeed an accelerating economic growth in Gujarat but those who did not benefit from it but were more exploited were the people at the bottom of economy and society so the polarization has enormously increased and that also explains why particularly the middle classes are so eager on Hindutva because they don't want to look over their shoulder to those who are left behind let them remain left behind. I'm truly sorry Jan we will have to go on for the last comments from Ganjjam Ganjjam a couple of minutes for you Ganjjam would you like to comment a couple of minutes responses to the question then we have to finish the the session well I don't have to add anything at present but but let me let me say something about the Gujarat model because the Gujarat model has succeeded the national level because the marketing of Narendra movie but also a Gujarat which is relatively economically developed and that was not because of Modi but since 1960 onwards and Modi cleverly marketed because I have seen outside Gujarat whenever I got to south India or north everybody was in praise of Modi because he was providing the jobs providing the health and so on and so forth and another neoliberal economy you see where the earlier government was in a declining stage people thought that this is a man who provides a job and industrial development everywhere not only in India but in outside the liberal scholars were so impressed by that so they ignored the Hindutva aspect of Narendra movie and in 2004 if you see the media most of the liberals started supporting Modi assuming that Hindutva car would remain in a backyard and I think that is that is that is where we have to stop once unfortunately there the next group of people that have booked the rooms are standing impatiently here so that is the absolute limit of time unfortunately so thank you and apologies for for interrupting us thank you to the people present here in seminar to those attending the webinar and to everyone contributing and to the team making it all running so smoothly thank you everyone and see you for the next seminar thank you and apologies for cutting your shores